Matters arising: cost-utility and cost-effectiveness analysis of disease-modifying drugs of relapsing–remitting multiple sclerosis: a systematic review
Abstract Background In their interesting systematic review, Gallehzan et al. quoted our article Cost-utility analysis of teriflunomide in naïve vs. previously treated patients with relapsing–remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS) in Italy. While we are grateful to Gallehzan et al. for their interest in...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
BMC
2025-01-01
|
| Series: | Health Economics Review |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://doi.org/10.1186/s13561-024-00562-y |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| _version_ | 1832586033898717184 |
|---|---|
| author | Carlo Lazzaro Roberto Bergamaschi Mauro Zaffaroni Rocco Totaro Damiano Paolicelli |
| author_facet | Carlo Lazzaro Roberto Bergamaschi Mauro Zaffaroni Rocco Totaro Damiano Paolicelli |
| author_sort | Carlo Lazzaro |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Abstract Background In their interesting systematic review, Gallehzan et al. quoted our article Cost-utility analysis of teriflunomide in naïve vs. previously treated patients with relapsing–remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS) in Italy. While we are grateful to Gallehzan et al. for their interest in the aim of our research, we would like to clarify some points. Methods We compare Gallehzan et al.’s statements about our article with the original publication. Results Gallehzan et al. omitted or misreported some relevant methodological issues and findings presented in our article. As far as methods are concerned, the main omissions were the 7-year time horizon of our study (that falls in between the 5–10 years range mentioned by Gallehzan et al. for other contributions) and the number of simulated RRMS naïve patients (1000). Regarding findings, Gallehzan et al. mistook the 0.480 incremental Quality-Adjusted Life Year gained by RRMS naïve patients vs. RRMS experienced patients on teriflunomide for the base case Incremental Cost-Utility Ratio (ICUR) calculated according to the societal viewpoint. In fact, for both the healthcare sector and societal perspectives adopted in our Markov model-based cost-utility analysis, the baseline results showed teriflunomide in RRMS naïve patients to be strongly dominant (that is, producing more QALYs and being, at the same time, cost-saving) vs. RRMS experienced patients. Therefore, the calculation of the two ICURs was not necessary. Conclusions As systematic reviews play a remarkable role in disseminating health economic research, a careful description of the methods and the findings reported in the included studies is of paramount importance. |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj-art-0e0a5a46f78b45ebabf734b116b71580 |
| institution | Kabale University |
| issn | 2191-1991 |
| language | English |
| publishDate | 2025-01-01 |
| publisher | BMC |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Health Economics Review |
| spelling | doaj-art-0e0a5a46f78b45ebabf734b116b715802025-01-26T12:15:05ZengBMCHealth Economics Review2191-19912025-01-011511310.1186/s13561-024-00562-yMatters arising: cost-utility and cost-effectiveness analysis of disease-modifying drugs of relapsing–remitting multiple sclerosis: a systematic reviewCarlo Lazzaro0Roberto Bergamaschi1Mauro Zaffaroni2Rocco Totaro3Damiano Paolicelli4Studio di Economia SanitariaIRCCS Mondino FoundationFormer Director, Multiple Sclerosis Centre, Hospital of Gallarate, ASST della Valle OlonaCentro Malattie Demielinizzanti, Ospedale San SalvatoreDepartment of Basic Medical Sciences, Neuroscience and Sense Organs, University of Bari “Aldo Moro”Abstract Background In their interesting systematic review, Gallehzan et al. quoted our article Cost-utility analysis of teriflunomide in naïve vs. previously treated patients with relapsing–remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS) in Italy. While we are grateful to Gallehzan et al. for their interest in the aim of our research, we would like to clarify some points. Methods We compare Gallehzan et al.’s statements about our article with the original publication. Results Gallehzan et al. omitted or misreported some relevant methodological issues and findings presented in our article. As far as methods are concerned, the main omissions were the 7-year time horizon of our study (that falls in between the 5–10 years range mentioned by Gallehzan et al. for other contributions) and the number of simulated RRMS naïve patients (1000). Regarding findings, Gallehzan et al. mistook the 0.480 incremental Quality-Adjusted Life Year gained by RRMS naïve patients vs. RRMS experienced patients on teriflunomide for the base case Incremental Cost-Utility Ratio (ICUR) calculated according to the societal viewpoint. In fact, for both the healthcare sector and societal perspectives adopted in our Markov model-based cost-utility analysis, the baseline results showed teriflunomide in RRMS naïve patients to be strongly dominant (that is, producing more QALYs and being, at the same time, cost-saving) vs. RRMS experienced patients. Therefore, the calculation of the two ICURs was not necessary. Conclusions As systematic reviews play a remarkable role in disseminating health economic research, a careful description of the methods and the findings reported in the included studies is of paramount importance.https://doi.org/10.1186/s13561-024-00562-ySystematic reviewsRelapsing-remitting multiple sclerosisTeriflunomideCost-utility analysisMarkov modelItaly |
| spellingShingle | Carlo Lazzaro Roberto Bergamaschi Mauro Zaffaroni Rocco Totaro Damiano Paolicelli Matters arising: cost-utility and cost-effectiveness analysis of disease-modifying drugs of relapsing–remitting multiple sclerosis: a systematic review Health Economics Review Systematic reviews Relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis Teriflunomide Cost-utility analysis Markov model Italy |
| title | Matters arising: cost-utility and cost-effectiveness analysis of disease-modifying drugs of relapsing–remitting multiple sclerosis: a systematic review |
| title_full | Matters arising: cost-utility and cost-effectiveness analysis of disease-modifying drugs of relapsing–remitting multiple sclerosis: a systematic review |
| title_fullStr | Matters arising: cost-utility and cost-effectiveness analysis of disease-modifying drugs of relapsing–remitting multiple sclerosis: a systematic review |
| title_full_unstemmed | Matters arising: cost-utility and cost-effectiveness analysis of disease-modifying drugs of relapsing–remitting multiple sclerosis: a systematic review |
| title_short | Matters arising: cost-utility and cost-effectiveness analysis of disease-modifying drugs of relapsing–remitting multiple sclerosis: a systematic review |
| title_sort | matters arising cost utility and cost effectiveness analysis of disease modifying drugs of relapsing remitting multiple sclerosis a systematic review |
| topic | Systematic reviews Relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis Teriflunomide Cost-utility analysis Markov model Italy |
| url | https://doi.org/10.1186/s13561-024-00562-y |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT carlolazzaro mattersarisingcostutilityandcosteffectivenessanalysisofdiseasemodifyingdrugsofrelapsingremittingmultiplesclerosisasystematicreview AT robertobergamaschi mattersarisingcostutilityandcosteffectivenessanalysisofdiseasemodifyingdrugsofrelapsingremittingmultiplesclerosisasystematicreview AT maurozaffaroni mattersarisingcostutilityandcosteffectivenessanalysisofdiseasemodifyingdrugsofrelapsingremittingmultiplesclerosisasystematicreview AT roccototaro mattersarisingcostutilityandcosteffectivenessanalysisofdiseasemodifyingdrugsofrelapsingremittingmultiplesclerosisasystematicreview AT damianopaolicelli mattersarisingcostutilityandcosteffectivenessanalysisofdiseasemodifyingdrugsofrelapsingremittingmultiplesclerosisasystematicreview |